The test

I shot from 10 meters, using a sandbag rest for the butt of the revolver. I held the gun with two hands for a steady hold. I shot 6 pellets at each target and I will describe what happened as we go. Let’s get started.

JSB Exact RS

The first pellet I tested was the JSB Exact RS. The first three shots landed low, with one below the target paper. The group had to come up somehow.

JSB Exact RS pellets hit the target low and left. One of the first three shots hit below the paper. I adjusted my sight picture to shoot the 6 shots shown above. One is in the bull — don’t miss it. This upper group measures 2.682-inches between centers.

Adjusted sight picture

I normally use a 6 o’clock hold when shooting bullseyes. With the Webley that resulted in the three lower shots. So I used a trick from my days shooting Colt Single Action Armys. When they shot low I held the front sight higher in the rear notch and still rested the bull on top of the front post. Look at the drawing below.

What I did was raise the barrel until the top of the wide bottom section of the front sight was level with the top of the rear notch. I can keep this wider base level with the top of the rear notch, but since the wider front sight base fills the rear notch completely. I can’t see anything left and right.

Once the front sight is elevated in the rear notch I then put the bull on top of the front post as always. That raised the strike of the pellet by about 4 inches at 10 meters, but it didn’t do anything about left and right. I continued to shoot the rest of the pellets using this same sight picture — hoping that one or more pellets would strike more to the left. Let’s see.

Why not fix the front sight?

Before we move on, some of you are wondering why I didn’t just file the front post down to raise the strike of the round. I didn’t for one reason — I didn’t want to damage the gun. Remember I said I learned this trick while shooting Colt Single Action Armys? The real ones (not replicas made by European makers) are worth thousands of dollars, and I won’t take a file to them. So, after reading Elmer Keith, I discovered this technique that works pretty well.

Sig Match Ballistic Alloy

Next up were Sig Match Ballistic Alloy pellets. Six of them went into 1.886-inches at 10 meters. That is a lot better than the JSB’s did, though the pellets are still to the right of the bullseye.

Though not small, the group of 6 Sig Match Ballistic Alloy pellets is much smaller than the group of JSB pellets fired before. Six pellets are in 1.886-inches, center-to-center.

Air Arms Falcons

The next pellet I tried was the Falcon from Air Arms. Six of them went into 2.358-inches at 10 meters. They are still hitting to the right of the bull.

Six Falcon pellets landed in a 2.358-inch group at 10 meters.

H&N Finale Match High Speed pellets

This is the wadcutter pellet that you can’t buy anymore. These weigh only 7 grains, while the current H&N Finale Match Light pellets weigh 7.87 grains. So, wouldn’t you know that they would group the best of all the pellets used, up to this point! Six went into 1.407-inches at 10 meters. One pellet just clipped the edge of the target paper, so I had to measure this group differently. I measured from the far edge of the pellet hole on the left to the near edge of the hole that just clipped the paper. Then I did not subtract a pellet diameter. That gives the same results as if I had measured to the far edge of the right hole and then subtracted one pellet diameter.

Six H&N Finale Match High Speed pellets made a 1.407-inch group at 10 meters.

RWS Hobbys

The final pellet I tested was the RWS Hobby. Six of them went into 1.407-inches at 10 meters. That’s right, this group size is identical to the group made by the Finale Match High Speed pellets. However, given the probable error in measurement, all we really know is that these two pellets are similar in accuracy. This was just a coincidence. But, since this is also the smallest group of the test, it’s nice that it was shot with a pellet that you can buy.

Six RWS Hobbys went into 1.407-inches at 10 meters.

Next — more sight corrections

I had hoped that one or more pellets would group farther to the right, but as you can see, that didn’t happen. Now I wanted to see if I could do something about that by using still a different sight picture.

At first I tried holding all of the sight base all the way to the left of the rear notch. That threw the pellet about 5 inches to the left, which is way too far. Then I tried holding the base so I could see just a sliver of light on the right side of the rear notch. That got me closer to the centerline with the remaining five pellets, but the aiming wasn’t precise as before, plus it was too difficult to do consistently. Five Hobby pellets went into 1.806-inches at 10 meters. After that attempt I stopped, because this was no longer fun.

The first pellet (arrow) went too far left. Then I tried a different hold that worked — sort of. Five Hobby pellets in 1.806-inches at 10 meters.

Ironically, the fixed sights on my Mark VI firearm revolver are dead-on at 15 yards. I guess if I had to choose between the two I would rather have the firearm be the one that’s accurate.

Summary

Unfortunately the Webley Mark VI pellet revolver that I’m testing is not that accurate. And the sights are off, as well. It would be hard to hit a soda can at 25 feet unless you learned the gun very well. The good news, though, is it shoots best with the cheapest pellets.

From a realism standpoint, this one is a winner. I was very impressed by the effort that was made to copy all the details of the firearm.

It’s not going to be my favorite shooter, but I will probably keep it for the realism, alone.

46 thoughts on “Webley Mark VI service revolver with battlefield finish: Part 4”

Sorry the sights could not be used as intended. Maybe they could make an adjustment to the casting(s) of the front or rear sight? It would be interesting to know if this is an across the board issue with the pellet version.

BB
I shoot my rimfire rifle like that at longer distances. I raise the front post above the rear sight. And for windage I just shoot a little to the right or left as needed in other words I keep my sights lined up like just mentioned but shoot to the left or right of the target. It works real good after doing just a few shots to get the hang of it.

I can shoot my rimfire rifle like that from 15 yards out to a 100 yards no problem with out ever making a adjustment. But that is of course after I done zeroed the sights for a certain distance. I definitely want adjustable sights. Then I do the holds as needed. Same as when I scope shoot.

So probably not that big of a deal that this pistol your testing can’t be adjusted. But I would like it better if the sights were adjustable. And on another note. If they were adjustable I bet it would be easier to repeat sighting and possibly get a more accurate pistol.

As I stated, I have the bb version and the Exhibition pellet versions .The sights on the nickel version were hard to pick up but after blackening the rib and putting red paint on the front post, I dialed into the black. The Battlefield version was a huge disappointment. Awful da pull , lousy action. I thought it might be just one bad apple but after reading this evaluation that does not appear to be the case. Returned mine for a refund. I will be surprised ifPyramid continues to offer them. A totally unacceptable revolver.

While I occasionally shoot soda cans in the backyard with my original black finish, smooth-bore Webley MK VI, a couple years ago I shot at targets in my basement at 30 meters, from a bag rest, with pellets (probably the RWS Hobby). I tried this because the internet was loaded with videos of folks shooting lead pellets out of the Webley smooth bore and getting incredible results.

I found it to be remarkably accurate as well, as long as I shot slowly and with single action. It is probably one of my most accurate CO2 pistols at 30 meters. My recollection was that it almost rivaled my 8 inch S&W 586 and 8 inch Dan Wesson.

I don’t know. I’ve read that the black ones have lighter and crisper triggers than the battlefield and nickel ones, as odd as that sounds. My trigger technique is quite poor, so the trigger makes a lot of difference when I am shooting anything.

I do not recall precisely, but I remember that I was pleased to see that it shot better with lead pellets at 30 meters than it did with BBs at a shorter distance, perhaps 20 feet. And I was simply using the shells that came with it for BBs. This was not long after the black BB model first came out, and it was the first of these.

Search youtube, and you will find a couple videos of guys shooting them with pellets and getting good results.

I would like to have a CO2 pistol that utilizes a magazine system such as Sig Sauer employs, but rather than being a replica of a handgun I would want it to look something like the handguns in the modern version of Battlestar Galactica. In the lower section of the top assembly one could have a built in green laser. When the CO2 pistol is fired, instead of blow back the excess gas is diverted forward to produce a shrill whistling sound. BEWWWW! BEWWWW! It could be equipped with a molded polymer holster and spare magazine holders.

A futuristic carbine could also be produced utilizing the same technology. I myself would be more inclined to play with something like this and I am sure there is a market for such with the younger or young at heart crowd.

There may be licensing issues but perhaps for replicas various Sci-Fi weapons could be reproduced. I would not mind having a phaser that shot pellets or bbs.

RidgeRunner
That is funny, but I do like it. Not maybe my cup of tea but neat just the same. That got me thinking, why do most phaser/laser guns in movies have a form of open sight or a peep/scope sight, but not a laser sight?

I’ve always wondered about that one. But it’s the style of theater that the director feels comfortable with. If a laser sight is used, then you have to do special effects to show the laser, and that doesn’t always enhance the shot. Though in some slow dramatic scenes like in the predator series, having that triple laser pattern show up on your face makes for immediate foreshadowing!

But when the shooter is the subject in a scene, laser sights do not film well when they are not being fired. So something that has the looks without needing to do anything makes for good theater

Personally, I would like to see a holographic sight that is a projected hologram that occupies a very large field of view

The holographic sight is exactly what I have thought about. Either that or a heads up display type of unit where you are wearing a pair of goggles or glasses and wherever the muzzle is pointed it shows a dot or other indicator. It may appear similar to a laser designator though with this type of projection you could have a large circle surrounding the indicator to help with location.

Have you ever seen the TRAP system? – Telepresent Rapid Aiming Platform

That has a remote video gunsight, as well as a remote control tripod. The system does not require making any alterations to the rifle used, so it’s always capable of returning back to standard use

Pyramyd is listing a whole bunch of digital scopes, which are the first I’ve seen. But so far I’ve not seen any that are based on the red dot holographic form factor. A pico projector to form the aiming points should work well

Goggles & glasses might be for a more advanced system that can adapt to changes in position on a persons head

What would work right now is something like the helmet used on the F35, a custom fit system that is tuned to the individual wearer & fully sensored to detect sightlines. The gun can use a laser designator to provide a reference to the helmets software, so the helmet must also have a camera system to locate that designator. The helmet will also have to provide it’s own ranging capability, but that could possibly make use of the gun laser with a very tight networked time reference. Bluetooth & WiFi will not be adequate for this, as those standards add tons of delay into their respective data streams. A hardwired connection running down the persons arm to a grip interface might be a better approach

You might as well make use of the TrackingPoint style fly-by-wire trigger, and monitor gun motion to determine the best moment to fire

With the proper exoskeleton/body armor suit it would be unnecessary to have a direct link to the weapon. The suit would be able to provide the required feedback of range, type of weapon being used, position, target location, etc. and provide the required aiming point. It would also be possible for the suit to actually reposition the weapon for the optimum shot, waiting for the command to commence firing.

For that matter the weaponry could be built into the suit. In fact, if we removed the human this would provide the required space to install the AI.

Yeah, it would make sense to simply have a gun vise built into the suit, in order to make use of any standard issue weapon. I think I was mixing up different hardware generations. Then place all the advanced systems inside the suit so no mods needed to the weapon. Having a built-in weapon system might be best if you consider a more advanced version of a holster, again remaining with unmodified standard issue weapons such as a pistol. But I think it would be a good idea if fully autonomous suits remain fully capable of carrying a human operator. For one thing, it would be a bad idea to have suits that look different from a distance. If necessary, an AI core would be built like an android. But I like the idea of placing the AI hardware on a suit without using the inner compartment. For example, if a human operator is knocked unconscious, the AI should take over and retreat to a medical station without any other overriding orders

But, with all that, I would find it more interesting to scale back to something more immediate. Exosuits have a power supply issue, and AI’s are still a work in progress, not quite reaching the battery-powered shoebox state just yet

For now, just a video camera on the rifle, with a FPV monitor. I was just recently looking at some very awkward-looking shooting positions & wondering if a video link would be legal on the course?

Bigger: The AI will be a clone of the operator, so it will have the fastest reaction in combined teamwork. With artificial telepathy and cybernetic implants, you never need to worry about dying, or forgetting where your car keys are, ever again

Because the actors just point in the general direction during filming and the blaster beams are “painted” in later. Time does not allow for proper sighting. Besides, the bad guy always misses and the good guy always hits. We could not have the bad guy able to center his laser designator on the good guy’s chest but hit three feet to the right.

What about taking advantage of the muzzle blast in order to generate sound effects?

Going with a noise-making ‘suppressor’ approach, then it could be a very slim core with any style outer housing for whatever application it’s used on. Different core versions would make different style sound effects, and the various cores could be interchangeable or replaced if malfunctioning

And in that frame, what about designing a core system BB pistol that can have any outer shell you like, including LED light effects tailored into shells that require such? The 1st housing could be a generic demonstrator that avoids copyright issues

The one I would want is the early ’80’s Atari Duck Hunt gun, in it’s classic light gray & blaze orange

First I suggest trying a different pellet. I have read of much better accuracy using Meisterkuglin (spelling) pellets. Can the rear sight notch be widened rather than thinning the front? It seems to me it might be easier.
If all else fails, have them send you a different revolver.

I have not had any luck in getting my plunger head apart on my Daisy Model H to install a new leather seal. It is now getting beat up. I have not found a parts diagram for the Model 12 or the Model H. The parts diagrams I have found for guns without the tube on the plunger head show one part number for the plunger head assembly with the seal already on it. I am beginning to think they are not made to come apart to replace the seal.

Here is a link to a plunger head that may work it is a bit spendy though. The plunger heads were 23 cents back in the day lol.

Knowing how I am. I would go ahead and buy that seal for $31 just to have it even if I didn’t use it. And usually when I sell a gun. Those kind of extras that I accumulated for that gun I usually let go with the gun.

And if you do get the seal and use it show how you did it with some pictures. And also if you do work to get a leather seal to work. And what kind of leather you use and where you got the leather from.

BB
I mentioned this a while back. Replica pistols that have barrels that are not fixed in place and actually slide back and forth will probably never be tack drivers. They must be loose to slide around.

In this case, the cartridge is loose in the cylinder and may not line up all the time with the centering forcing cone and result in minor clipping. There may be slightly offset countersinking in front of each cylinder bore that lines up with the forcing cone. The forcing cone needs to be loose to slide in and out as well as the barrel. Although the cylinder and barrel cone should line up once engaged, any play in the cylinder and its lock up may introduce some slop.
The holes in the receiver and outer barrel that fit the barrel and cone would also have to be precision aligned and drilled.

Also I still think that a pellet transitioning from the smooth bore cartridge to a rifled barrel must push forward on that barrel somewhat as it engages the rifling and unseat the forcing cone barrel unit. May be just enough to free float the barrel and lead to irregular points of impact.

What I’m getting at is there are a lot of things that may affect its accuracy and they would have to be exactly the same for each shot for any accuracy. Not too likely with all those moving parts.
Sometimes you win and sometimes you don’t. May depend on the manufacturing accuracy of each part.

Personally I can live with it if it’s necessary to have a functioning replica … at a reasonable price.
Bob M

Shootski
Some airgun pistols, mostly semi-auto type, actually use the barrel as a hammer. The trigger pushes the barrel forward and lets the next bb in the mag pop up in place. The barrel then slips off the trigger, returns to capture the bb and continues on back to slam into the CO2 valve. The Cobray M11 and Daisy Powerline 5170, over 500FPS. operate that way. They usually have a bit more power with this set up but give up on accuracy.

These revolvers don’t actually have a forcing cone at the barrel entry like a real firearm with a set gap between the cylinder These have a spring loaded barrel and a dome cone that pops back into the cylinder cone and centers it up with the barrel eliminating any air gap. The round dome cone is pushed forward by the rotating cylinder and is then spring loaded into the next cylinder bore. A lot of play with this set up.

So It is a liner barrel of sorts. Could the liner be rotated as a first step?
Can the muzzle end of the barrel (liner) be shimmed? And, the inside of the psuedo barrel be filed near the muzzle to get the sights and liners bore aligned? Or is there just too much slop in the system?

Where is that strong and steady right to left crosswind when you need it?
Alternately you could rotate the pistol 90° counterclockwise and solve both the shooting to the left and low!
It would also give you some serious street cred…

I would inspect the forcing cone and some pellets shot into a soft medium. I’m suspicious of the tears in the target paper since windage deviation would match the apparent yaw as long as it isn’t a full tumble.
In all seriousness, does the pistol have a barrel liner? You can guess where that thought train goes!
If no barrel liner…you could also try a barrel bend for both elevation and windage corrections.

While (briefly) browsing the PA website, there is a pop up from someone asking if I would like some help. Ok. Fine.
I have hit chat 2x to express my displeasure with this,…. as in before,… an X out would make this stop. Now,… it stays there, on (every) page as I am browsing.

If this is something new,….. I (strongly) disapprove. I could go on and get more irate, but I will not. I do not think that long time customers of PA and experienced air gunners in general,.. appreciate a pop up staying put,.. as one is trying to browse the PA site.

It did just do a major update, so maybe something changed,….? My point is that it has never happened before, which made me think it is something on their end. Either way, not good. I will look into it.

I just “bounced around” the PA website and it did not happen. I did look into a pop up blocker in MS, but found nothing direct. Either way, it appears to be gone,…. which suits me fine. I do not mind help, but only when I ask for it. That’s the update.